Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    F6F Hellcat vs A6M Zero-sen: Pacific Theater 1943–44
    F6F Hellcat vs A6M Zero-sen: Pacific Theater 1943–44
    F6F Hellcat vs A6M Zero-sen: Pacific Theater 1943–44
    Ebook157 pages1 hour

    F6F Hellcat vs A6M Zero-sen: Pacific Theater 1943–44

    By Edward M. Young, Jim Laurier and Gareth Hector

    5/5

    ()

    Read preview

    About this ebook

    The Grumman F6F Hellcat and Mitsubishi A6M Zero-sen were the two principal opposing fighters in the brutal aerial clashes of the Pacific War from 1943 onwards. Reminiscent of the preceding F4F Wildcat, the F6F Hellcat was designed specifically to counter the earlier A6M2 Zero-sen, the strengths and weaknesses of which became fully understood by US designers after an undamaged example was recovered in the Aleutians. The powerful Hellcat had an impressive top speed, rate of climb and armament, and it retained its predecessor's incredible ruggedness. The A6M5 Zero-sen was also born out of an earlier type, but was intended merely as a stop-gap until more modern Japanese fighters could be produced to restore performance parity with Allied aircraft. The chaotic conditions of the Japanese Aircraft industry and war economy prevented new types from being built.Featuring detailed artwork illustrating the technical specifications of these two types and the dramatic encounters between them, this volume focuses on how these iconic fighters came into being, and how they fared as they faced one another over the Pacific skies of World War II.
    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherBloomsbury Publishing
    Release dateAug 20, 2014
    ISBN9781782008156
    F6F Hellcat vs A6M Zero-sen: Pacific Theater 1943–44
    Author

    Edward M. Young

    Edward M. Young is a retired financial executive with a BA degree in Political Science from Harvard University and an MA from the University of Washington. In 2015 he received an MA in the History of Warfare from King's College, London and in 2020 completed a PhD in History at King's College. During his career he had assignments in New York, London, Tokyo, and Hong Kong. He is the author of numerous books and articles on aviation history. He lives with his wife in Seattle, Washington.

    Related to F6F Hellcat vs A6M Zero-sen

    Titles in the series (1)

    View More
    View More

    Related ebooks

    Modern History For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      Flying The “George”

      Jun 16, 2020

      Flying The “George”
      4 min read

    • Article

      Why Betty Bombed

      Sep 4, 2018

      Why Betty Bombed
      10 min read

    • Article

      Machine Of Death

      Feb 26, 2020

      Machine Of Death
      1 min read

    • Article

      Mitsubishi A6 M ‘Zero’

      Oct 31, 2019

      Mitsubishi A6 M ‘Zero’
      3 min read

    • Article

      Mcdonnell F2h Banshee

      Oct 6, 2022

      Mcdonnell F2h Banshee
      4 min read

    • Article

      Fast And Furious

      Apr 5, 2022

      Fast And Furious
      13 min read

    • Article

      Macchi 202 Vs. P-38l

      Jun 16, 2020

      Macchi 202 Vs. P-38l
      10 min read

    • Article

      The Last Spitfire

      Jan 24, 2023

      The Last Spitfire
      3 min read

    • Article

      America’s “Few”

      Jan 20, 2022

      America’s “Few”
      8 min read

    • Article

      United Kingdom

      Apr 18, 2019

      United Kingdom
      6 min read

    • Article

      Second Best

      Jan 24, 2023

      Second Best
      11 min read

    • Article

      Defending The Fleet

      Oct 21, 2021

      Defending The Fleet
      7 min read

    • Article

      Sturmpanzerwagen A7v

      Apr 19, 2018

      Sturmpanzerwagen A7v
      4 min read

    • Article

      Sturmovik Killer!

      Dec 14, 2021

      Sturmovik Killer!
      10 min read

    • Article

      Savoia-marchetti Sm.79

      Jul 11, 2019

      Savoia-marchetti Sm.79
      3 min read

    • Article

      Dive-bombing Mustangs

      Feb 1, 2022

      Dive-bombing Mustangs
      9 min read

    • Article

      Clash On The Devil’s Bridge

      Jun 18, 2020

      Clash On The Devil’s Bridge
      7 min read

    • Article

      Land Down Under

      Aug 4, 2020

      Land Down Under
      1 min read

    • Article

      Pete Knight’s Wild Rides

      Dec 22, 2020

      Pete Knight’s Wild Rides
      10 min read

    • Article

      Soon To Be Discontinued

      Jan 25, 2022

      Soon To Be Discontinued
      11 min read

    • Article

      Malta’s Spitfire Ace

      Dec 27, 2019

      Malta’s Spitfire Ace
      15 min read

    • Article

      The Luftwaffe’s Lost Cause

      Apr 5, 2022

      The Luftwaffe’s Lost Cause
      11 min read

    • Article

      Hardware Albatros D.III

      Dec 24, 2019

      Hardware Albatros D.III
      1 min read

    • Article

      Boeing P-26a Peashooter

      May 13, 2021

      Boeing P-26a Peashooter
      2 min read

    Related categories

    Reviews for F6F Hellcat vs A6M Zero-sen

    5/5

    1 rating1 review

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

    • 5/5
      Excellent comparisons in design, construction, modifications during war. And operational use of the aircraft over the WW2 period. Must Read!

    Book preview

    F6F Hellcat vs A6M Zero-sen - Edward M. Young

    NARA)

    DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT

    F6F HELLCAT

    The genesis of the F6F Hellcat dates back to discussions the Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation had with the US Navy’s Bureau of Aeronautics in early 1938. At the time, Grumman was heavily involved in testing its new XF4F-2 monoplane fighter for the US Navy. The XF4F-2’s 1,050hp Pratt & Whitney R-1830-66 engine with a single-stage supercharger gave it a maximum speed of around 290mph. At a conference between Grumman engineers and Bureau of Aeronautics representatives in January 1938, there was a discussion about modifying the XF4F-2 to take the new and more powerful 1,600hp Wright R-2600 engine. The Bureau indicated it might decide to place a contract with Grumman for an experimental fighter with the Wright engine, if the desired maximum and landing speeds could be obtained.

    In February, Leroy Grumman sent an informal proposal to the Bureau stating that Grumman could provide a prototype of a modified XF4F-2 within 120 days. Grumman engineers estimated that the modified airplane with the R-2600 would have a maximum speed of 320mph, with the stalling speed of 70mph the US Navy required. Grumman engineers believed that modifying the XF4F-2 to take the R-2600 has practically no effect on the external dimensions and appearance of the XF4F-2 airplane. Grumman proposed that the new airplane, the Model G-33, should retain the XF4F-2’s mid-wing design, with an increase in fuel capacity and the same armament of one 0.30in. and one 0.50in. machine gun in the nose, with provision for two more 0.50in. machine guns in the wing.

    The Bureau of Aeronautics was less sanguine about Grumman’s ability to adopt the Wright engine to the XF4F-2 without major modifications. The Bureau believed the increase in gross weight from the heavier engine would push the landing speed above acceptable limits, thus necessitating the creation of a new wing design, and alter the center of gravity unfavorably. It also felt that the larger propeller needed to absorb the greater power of the Wright engine would reduce the ground clearance below the US Navy’s requirements with the XF4F-2’s landing gear configuration. Instead, for its 1938 fighter design competition the US Navy chose to pursue the Grumman XF5F-1, its first twin-engined fighter, over a more powerful XF4F-2.

    In this same competition, the US Navy gave a contract to Chance Vought for the XF4U-1 with the new Pratt & Whitney R-2800 engine. But neither Grumman nor the US Navy gave up completely on the idea of a more powerful version of the XF4F, even after the former won a contract for production of the revised F4F-3.

    In September 1940, Grumman submitted a revised design to the Bureau of Aeronautics as the Model G-50. This was an improved version of the F4F with a Wright R-2600-10 engine, using a two-stage supercharger, providing 1,700hp at takeoff. At this stage the Model G-50 looked like a larger F4F. Grumman had increased the wingspan by approximately four feet by adding two-foot-wide wing stubs between the F4F’s wing and the fuselage, and lengthened the fuselage by two feet, but retained the fuselage-mounted landing gear. Grumman estimated that the Model G-50 would have a top speed of close to 380mph.

    Although the Bureau of Aeronautics thought the Model G-50 was an attractive design, it was still not satisfied with the airplane’s balance and center of gravity. In addition, the Bureau pointed out to Grumman that recent developments have led to additional requirements for Class VF aircraft which must be met if the airplane in question is to be considered satisfactory for service use.

    Based on reports coming in from US Navy observers in Europe, the Bureau of Aeronautics realized that it needed carrier fighters with higher speed, greater range, heavier armament and more armor protection. The Bureau now wanted a maximum speed of close to 400mph, a range of 1,500 miles with on-board and droppable fuel tanks, armament of six 0.50in. machine guns with 400 rounds per gun or four 20mm cannon with 120 rounds per gun, and protection for the pilot, fuel tanks and oil tank. To maximize the number of aircraft on its carriers, the Bureau mandated folding wing mechanisms. Looking at a range of fighter designs employing both air-cooled and liquid-cooled engines, the Bureau thought it would be desirable to have other air-cooled radial engine designs as competition for the Chance Vought F4U. A redesign of the F4F held promise, particularly if Grumman could explore the possibility of housing the landing gear in the wing instead of the fuselage. The Bureau requested that Grumman modify its design and resubmit its proposal in light of these new

    Enjoying the preview?
    Page 1 of 1